Indirectly/directly, Americans felt in many ways and that was my point
They very next day media types were able to find Ivy League nitwits who couldnât bring themselves to say the terrorist were evil.
It affected most of us indirectly if only to stir up momentary outrage but that outrage quickly faded for most of the country.
Very few people however were directly affected by the attacks that day and they were mostly in NY, CT, and NJ was what I stated to begin with.
âDIrectlyâ and âIndirectlyâ have distinctly different meanings.
Thereâs still a whole lot of folks particularly on the left but also in the Paulitarian Mob who believe we were and still are the problem and that we deserved it.
âPaulitarian Mobâ?
That one is new to me. Care to explain?
I could have sworn you were around when the Ron Paul âmobâ went nuts back circa 200708/09 and earned the title âPaulitarian Mobâ or âPaulitarian Mafiaâ?
Some of those guys were so far out to lunch they were dangerous.
with the same outcome , our country hasnât been the same since.
And anyone that says " we deserved" has either a sick sense of humor, or has no clue about history and should not be taken seriously.
I thought thatâs what you may have been referring to. But maybe my perception of them was different at the time?
Or maybe I was focused on utter opposition to Leftists and Democrats? I do recall, in addition to posting about Hillary, writing sometimes long posts in light of the Chicago Annenburg Challenge to try to demonstrate what a goober Obama was or else argue that making âHistoryâ (in the sense of fulfilling some supposed grand narrative) is a poor excuse to make history (what actually happens) ⊠silly me, I didnât understand yet that the ability to piss off millions of other peopleâs money was rĂ©sumĂ© material to the Left and that when all youâve got is symbolism then making History is all you need (and Barry was just more Historical than Clinton).
They were completely off the rails hence they earned the title âPaulitarian Mafiaâ.
They blame pretty much all of the ails of the world including 9-11 on US FP in the post war era right up to present.
Where Islam is concerned that would be like blaming the sheepdog for the lionâs mutton lust.
Whether youâre willing to admit it or not thereâs a clear distinction between the two.
Youâre right, the country has not been the same since nor will it ever be. In many ways 9-11 and its aftermath have led to a greater division in this country than weâve seen since the civil war.
Even during the civil rights era and Vietnam Protests we were not as divided as we are today.
Much of that division began with the Code Pink Protesters and has grown into a rabid opposition to anything supported by any republican and itâs been festering now for most of 2 decades like an abscess thatâs about to burst.
Yes , I know the difference between the two, I have a good grasp of the english language.
As in the rest of what youâve posted, I agree, since the hypocritical code pink social justice warriors of course they say nothing or even acknowledge other countries involved in conflicts/wars.
But because its a republican president that declared war on the poor innocent Iraqiâs and that gentleman Saddam who was killing his enemies like a sport, the SJWâs say nothing, do nothing, or even acknowledge it
Im curious why the SJW code pink brigade say nothing about Boko haram brutality raping and killing of women, oh right, they are not Americans so their lives donât matter, they rather protest a Republican president who said when youâre famous you can grab women by the pussy vs what those bastards in the name of Islam who advocates raping them at will for sport in those african nations where Boko Haram are.
If you understood it why did you post this?
As for the rest, Sometimes itâs fun to go to youtube and post the direct quotes from the âdemocratic leadersâ who prior to Bushâs election were calling for the ouster of Saddam because he was the most dangerous man in the ME since Adolph Hitler.
Suddenly with Bushâs election they forgot he was slaughtering around 200,000 of his own people annually and had flat stated plainly that he was going to begin gobbling up as much of the ME as he could.
Arguments today are mostly becoming reflexive, if âSo and Soâ says X we must all pounce on it not because it isnât true, but because canât be seen agreeing with âSo and SOâ particularly when it comes to the left thus they keep pushing further and further left with no consideration whatsoever for how their position will affect the nation in the long term.
1 Like
You really like to break balls and get the last word in âŠgood Lord.
very true, I just wonder why Republicans havenât called them out on it, there are many times Democrats leaders say the same thing as Republicans but when they say it itâs okay, when the republicans say it , itâs considered evil and treacherous to the nation.
Hypocrites.
1 Like
No but you failed to answer the question. If you understood what I was saying why did you go on such a rant?
The republicans actually did a good job of calling out their hypocrisy it just didnât get much if any play anywhere other than talk radio or Fox News because that isnât a narrative the leftwing media wants to publicize.
The truth is rarely on their side.
Itâs what to expect when you turn loose, drooling knuckle dragging primitives, in communities populated by humans.
Umm, just like in this case 2 of the 3 people involved in those cases were native born.